True, but there are many types of openness -- backchannels are fine so long as they are not appealed to as the basis of any particular decision. Any logic worked out in a backchannel should be publicly re-posted and open for discussion in some sort of santized form. One can also alert to the presence of backchannel discussions (i.e. "Jimbo and were having a discussion the other day...") without actually making everyone privvy to them.
Transparency and lack of privacy are not the same thing, is all I am saying.
FF
On 2/28/06, charles matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
"Leif Knutsen" wrote
- Admins should strive for transparency in their workings. Backchannel
communications should be an exception limited to very specific problems.
That at least is not really practical. There is constant need to share information, that should not be posted on the Wikipedia sites. (Think about it - so we really want discussions of users by admins, including necessary detective work, on the site?).
Charles
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l